To fork or not to fork?

[thinkingfish]

Shall we each clone the repo under our own account, and submit pull requests from there, or shall we continue to create branches under the main repo?

Only those with write-access to the main repo can create branches, which means the workflow is different for those who have this access and those who don't. On the other hand, it is easier to see what branches are outstanding when they are all in one place, before a PR is created, and it doesn't require we modify how we setup our local repo yet again.

[seppo0010]

We should fork, but once it is open source.

[sagar0]

Based on Forking Projects guide, I get the feeling that if you have write access to master (i.e. a maintainer), then forking is not necessary. But for any one who is not on the 'maintainers' list and want to contribute to the project, the only way to do that is to fork and create a pull request.

I don't have much experience on Github collaboration to vote on the issue, but may be we should talk to other twitter folks too who maintain major twitter repositories (say, finagle or scalding).

[sagar0]

+1 to fork.
After getting some more experience with the github work flow, I am all for forking. In my personal workflow, I tend to create a ton of branches for every minor idea that I get. Plus I am paranoid about my hard disk crashing, due to which I tend to push all my local branches to origin. I don't want to pollute twitter/pelikan repo with all my crappy branches.

[seppo0010]

👍 let's do that. I'll use fork for all my new changes.